Skip to main content
Glama

asana_get_multiple_tasks_by_gid

Fetch detailed information for multiple Asana tasks by supplying their GIDs, up to 25 tasks at once, with optional fields.

Instructions

Get detailed information about multiple tasks by their GIDs (maximum 25 tasks)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
task_idsYesArray or comma-separated string of task GIDs to retrieve (max 25)
opt_fieldsNoComma-separated list of optional fields to include
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the 25-task maximum limit, which is a key constraint, but it omits any details about error behavior, permissions, or return format. This is a modest disclosure that avoids contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and key limit. No filler or redundant content exists.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's relative simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description adequately covers the essential use case. It notes the batch aspect and max limit, but lacks any detail about response shape or error cases, which would be expected in a fully complete context. Still, it is sufficient for a straightforward GET operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Because schema description coverage is 100%, the schema already fully documents both parameters (task_ids and opt_fields). The description adds little beyond the schema, only hinting at 'detailed information' which is not a strong supplement. Baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Get'), the resource ('tasks'), and the specific qualifier ('by their GIDs', 'multiple', 'maximum 25 tasks'). This distinguishes it from single-task retrieval (asana_get_task) and search tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for retrieving multiple tasks by GID, which is a clear context. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like asana_get_task or mention when not to use it, so there is slight room for improvement.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/katxuyu/asana-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server